Chevron, the only U.S. oil company with a major presence in Venezuela, said Wednesday that it has been assigned additional acreage in the Orinoco Belt, where it has active operations. The company plans to invest more than $7 billion over the next five years, with the goal of more than doubling its current production to about 600,000 barrels a day.

“Chevron’s history in Venezuela spans more than a century, and our expanded position reflects our confidence in the country’s deep resource potential,” CEO Mike Wirth said in a prepared statement.

Venezuela holds the world’s largest proven reserves, totaling more than 303 billion barrels of crude oil, according to OPEC’s 2025 Annual Statistical Bulletin. Saudi Arabia is a distant second with 267 billion barrels.

Yet because Venezuela’s energy infrastructure is severely degraded and the nation is operating under international sanctions, its daily production is just over 1 million barrels, compared with the 10 million to 11 million barrels that Saudi Arabia produces each day. The U.S. produces almost 14 million barrels per day.

Chevron, the second-largest U.S. oil company, has had a presence in Venezuela since 1923.

U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright on Wednesday attended a ceremony in Venezuela’s capital in which Chevron, Italian oil company Eni and other energy companies signed agreements with the South American country’s government.

“President Trump’s mission in Venezuela is straightforward. The mission is to bring peace, freedom, opportunity and prosperity to the people of Venezuela,” Wright said in Caracas. “I believe the deals that are signed today — tens of billions of dollars of investment, ultimately many thousands of jobs — are critical in starting this ball rolling of peace, opportunity and prosperity for everyone in Venezuela.”

The White House confirmed Monday that it is partnering with North American Blue Energy Partners, NABEP, as part of Trump’s push to tap into Venezuela’s oil industry.

Yet the agreement has been met with skepticism from energy experts who say it will take years to revive Venezuela’s oil industry, which is in disarray after years of neglect.

There are also questions about whether Venezuela’s acting president, Delcy Rodríguez, has the authority to give NABEP 100-year rights over 17 oil fields with reserves of 65 billion barrels — and whether future Venezuelan or American administrations would overturn the agreement.

Venezuela’s constitution states that arrangements like the one that the United States has entered must be approved by the National Assembly, which has not happened, wrote Ian Vásquez, vice president for international studies at the Cato Institute.

“The deal lacks legitimacy since it was agreed to with a dictatorship that has clung to power for decades through violence and by committing what was probably the largest electoral fraud in Latin American history in 2024,” Vásquez wrote. “The agreement was also reached under overwhelming pressure, military and otherwise, from the United States. As such, any future Venezuelan democracy will question the deal, thus undermining confidence in the current arrangement.”

The ruling party-controlled National Assembly expressed support for the agreement during its Tuesday session, but lawmakers held no debate or voted to approve it.

Wright on Wednesday pushed back on criticism, telling reporters that the deal is “a massive win” for both countries.

“Because what it’s going to do is take resources that are underground, not helping anyone, and invest capital and money and technology and bring them to the surface to better the lives of Venezuelans, better supply energy to Americans,” Wright said during a joint press conference with Rodríguez.

Trump has eyed Venezuela’s oil since the January capture of then-President Nicolás Maduro and has pressed to get U.S. businesses back into the country. “We have Exxon going in, we have Chevron going in. We have our big oil companies going in,” he said that same month.

He suggested again on Monday that other U.S. oil majors were preparing for a return, though other than Chevron, there is no evidence of that.

Exxon Mobil CEO Darren Woods said in January that Venezuela was “uninvestable.” An Exxon spokesman said this week that “nothing has changed.”

The history of U.S. oil majors in Venezuela explains the hesitation.

Venezuela nationalized its oil industry in 1976 and created the state-owned company Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. A second nationalization occurred in 2007, when President Hugo Chávez pushed foreign oil companies into state-controlled joint ventures and seized the assets of companies that refused. Chevron agreed to a joint venture. Others, including Exxon and ConocoPhillips, refused, and Venezuela took their assets.

Trump has said that the agreement with Venezuela would “substantially lower” gasoline prices in the U.S. However, analysts have repeatedly warned that Venezuela’s dilapidated oil infrastructure will require years of restoration work and tens of billions of dollars to resuscitate.

“It could take 2 to 4 years to get new greenfield facilities online in the Orinoco region,” Amy Jaffe, director of the Global Energy, Climate, and Sustainability Lab at New York University, said in an email. “Other places where there is no pipeline and other kinds of support infrastructure could take longer.”

Meanwhile, the national average price for a gallon of regular gasoline jumped overnight to $4.12, according to the motor club AAA. That is 93 cents more than it cost at this point last year.

This post appeared first on https://www.nbcnews.com

“I always believe that when you do well, you know, personally, then you can go out and take care of other people,” said Andrew Cherng, who is co-founder, co-chair and co-CEO of Panda Express along with his wife, Peggy Cherng.

“You want people to do well,” he said. “And you want to treat them well.”

Cherng measures progress in part by how many of his managers make $100,000 or more annually. He also tracks whether those managers can afford to buy homes, and he considers that a barometer of his own success.

Yet over the past decade, that American dream of homeownership has slipped out of reach for millions of middle-class families.

With low housing stock across the country, mortgage rates hovering at 6.8% and home prices in some cities at record levels, there is little relief in sight.

Immigrant families are also less likely to own their homes than families headed by native-born U.S. residents, according to census data. Experts point to several factors that are likely to contribute to the disparity, including limited employment and income prospects, language barriers and inconsistent access to banks and financing.

Peggy Cherng said the couple recognize elements of their own journeys in those of their employees. “Most of our associates are first-generation immigrants,” she said.

Andrew was born in China and immigrated to the U.S. in 1966 after having grown up in Taiwan and Japan. Peggy was born in Myanmar and raised in Hong Kong.

The couple met at the University of Missouri and opened their first Panda Express in 1983 in Glendale, California. At the time, they envisioned it as a casual offshoot of Panda Inn, the full-service Chinese restaurant Andrew opened with his father in the early 1970s.

That immigrant experience remains central to how the couple run the business today, particularly a focus on investing in their employees, whom they consider their extended family.

Today, Panda Express is America’s largest Asian restaurant chain, with more than 2,500 locations across 49 states and restaurants in 12 countries. The privately held company employs around 55,000 people and generates around $7 billion in annual sales, according to data compiled by market research firm Technomic.

For Andrew, the foundation of that success is built from the ground up — starting with his employees.

“How do we help these people to have a better life? That’s our mission,” he said in an interview at the company’s headquarters outside Los Angeles, part of NBC News’ “Business in America” initiative.

Peggy said, “Our mission, our calling, is how we are able to help more associates realize their American dream, establish their business, their career, but most importantly, mark that accomplishment by owning a home.”

And despite the long list of obstacles to first-time homeownership, Andrew wants to help his Panda Express employees focus on what is possible rather than what stands in their way.

“We actually help everybody to think about owning a home very quickly,” he said.

Many of the managers he hires initially seem to view the position as just another job, he said, not a potential career path.

Managers “have to do a lot of things,” he said. “We teach them [those skills], but to have a good life, you turn that person from being sort of ‘task-based’ to ‘life-based.’”

That transformation, according to Andrew, often instills a deeper sense of purpose in his employees — one that extends to caring for others and their communities.

“We get people to see that quickly and see it clearly,” he said.

This post appeared first on https://www.nbcnews.com

Nebraska’s GOP senators, Deb Fischer and Pete Ricketts, said in separate posts on X that Trump’s decision was unwise.

“I’m extremely disappointed by this decision from the White House,” Fischer wrote. “We all want lower grocery prices, but as I’ve said for months, we cannot do it at the expense of American producers. Flooding the market with foreign beef hurts our livestock industry.”

Ricketts wrote: “I appreciate the Administration’s work to lower grocery prices. Short term policy shifts do not equal long term solutions. Flooding the market with lower quality beef compromises Nebraska farmers and ranchers.”

The president announced Friday on Truth Social that “the United States will allow up to 300,000 metric tons of product for ground beef to be imported with no out of quota tariff. We have a commitment that this beef will be sold at 25 percent below current market prices.”

Trump did not say which companies that import beef had agreed to this commitment or what countries would supply the meat.

Explaining his decision, the president pledged that this deal “will reduce prices for Americans while giving space for our Great American Beef Herd to grow again.”

Sen. Tim Sheehy, R-Mont., also cited the hardships American cattle farmers would face as a result of the president’s decision and referred to conversations he’s had with Trump about this issue.

“The President’s heart is in the right place on wanting lower prices for the American people, and beef prices have been impacted by the Mexican screwworm,” Sheehy wrote on X. “But the reality is this action will make it more difficult for American ranchers to rebuild our herd and bring prices down for the American people. And most importantly, this will harm our ranching families who feed the nation.”

Rep. Ashley Hinson, R-Iowa, who is running for Senate and received Trump’s endorsement in the race, also panned his announcement, writing in a post on X, “I want to lower prices but this is a bad idea.”

Hinson said that instead of allowing beef imports without tariffs, “We should be focused on cutting red tape for cattle producers, lowering the cost of production, and supporting market-based solutions to support Iowa producers and lower costs for consumers.”

Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, writing in his custom shorthand on X, also expressed concern about Trump’s announcement, writing that “USA cattlemen shld always be put 1st thru America 1st policies.”

Grassley also expressed a “need 2keep up progress fighting screwworm+ expanding domestic herd.”

On Friday, the president defended his decision when asked at Joint Base Andrews about the criticism he was facing from fellow Republicans.

“Well, we want to get the beef prices down, so we’ll get them down a little bit, and that’s what people want. That’s what the voters want, and that’s what I want,” he told reporters. “The ranchers are great. They’re my people. I love the ranchers. They’ve done a fantastic job, but they admit that we need a little help, and in order to get the prices down, so that’s what we’re doing.”

The White House did not immediately respond to NBC News’ request for comment on the lawmakers’ criticisms of Trump’s plan.

U.S. cattle ranchers have faced headwinds for years that have sent beef prices higher, including shrinking supply. According to the American Farm Bureau Federation, the United States’ current cattle herd is the nation’s smallest since 1951.

A flesh-eating screwworm that targets cattle was also detected in the U.S. earlier this year for the first time in decades, further threatening cattle herds.

Trump first floated the idea of lowering imports on beef last year, but the notion was quickly shot down by a similar group of GOP senators from agricultural states.

“I represent a beef-producing state. We have four times as many cattle as people,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said at the time, explaining his opposition.

On Friday, leaders for a top industry group representing cattle farmers, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, also said they were “disappointed” with Trump’s announcement.

“NCBA is disappointed by the President’s statement,” said Colin Woodall, the group’s chief executive officer. “While America’s cattle producers share the goal of keeping groceries affordable for consumers, flooding the market with government-subsidized, below-market beef is not the way to rebuild the American cattle herd.”

“Today’s announcement and other market interventions throw cold water on the prospect of herd expansion and sacrifices long-term stability for short term messaging,” Woodall added.

This post appeared first on https://www.nbcnews.com